房屋征收类行政诉讼中强拆实施主体的认定问题探析  

Study on the Identification of the Subject of Forcible Demolition in the Administrative Litigation of House Expropriation

作　　者：田勇军[1] Tian Yongjun(Party School of the Guizhou Provincial Committee of CPC,Guiyang 550028,Guizhou,China)

机构地区：[1]中共贵州省委党校法学教研部,贵州贵阳550028

出　　处：《贵州省党校学报》2022年第4期108-117,共10页Journal of Guizhou Provincial Party School

基　　金：中共贵州省委党校校级重点课题“法治国家、法治政府、法治社会一体建设问题研究”(项目批准号:2021SWDXXJKTZD01)阶段性研究成果。

摘　　要：住宅是公民生存和发展的基础。从宪法层面来说,住宅权是公民的基本权利,反过来则是国家的义务;土地的特性决定了其被置于政府管理范畴的必要性,建于土地之上且与土地具有同样性质的房屋也具有置于行政管理范畴的必要性。基于“谁管理谁担责”“谁受益谁保护”“谁受益谁担责”等原则,政府具有保护公民住宅权的义务和责任;地方政府更具备查明拆迁主体的能力;保障公民住房不受非法破坏是政府最为基本的底线义务。诉讼中原告若提交了能证明“房屋曾存在、原告与房屋有利害关系、房屋已被强拆、被告具有强拆动因”的证据,法院即可适用推定被告行政主体是强拆活动实施主体之举证规则,该推定属于可反驳的推定,是前提性责任,是单个事实的推定,而非整个诉讼结果责任的推定。原告的证据愈充分,被告反证该推定结论的难度就愈大。在制度方面可借助于司法解释明确该推定型举证规则。Housing is the foundation of citizens'existence and development.From the constitutional perspective,the right to housing is the basic right of citizens,which in turn is the obligation of the state.The characteristics of land determine the necessity of being placed in the scope of government management.Houses built on land and with the same nature as land also have the necessity of being placed in the scope of administrative management.Based on the principles of"the one who manages shall bear the responsibility","the one who benefits shall protect","the one who benefits shall bear the responsibility",the government should have the obligation and responsibility to protect citizens'housing rights.The local government has the advantage of obtaining evidence about the demolition action.It is the basic obligation of the government to protect citizens'houses from illegal destruction.As long as the plaintiff proves the evidence that“The house has ever existed;the plaintiff has an interest with the house;the house has been demolished”,the principle should be applied that the local governmen(t the defendant)was the destroyer of the house unless the contrary evidence is provided.This principle of burden of proof is the one that can be rebutted,and also is a premise responsibility,and the results of principle is that is just a fact be ascertained,not the results of the whole lawsuit.In the process of disproving the presumptive conclusion,the more sufficient the evidence of the plaintiff,the more difficult for the defendant to disprove.It is the presumption of a single fact,not the presumption of responsibility for the result of the whole lawsuit.In terms of system,we can clarify the presumption proof rule with the help of judicial interpretation.It is the presumption of a single fact,not the presumption of responsibility for the result of the whole lawsuit.

关 键 词：住宅权 不动产 举证责任 推定 反证 

分 类 号：D925.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]